Numbers Must Go Down

Synthaea By Synthaea, 20th Sep 2010 | Follow this author | RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/4j40fdrd/
Posted in Wikinut>Writing>Personal Experiences

I got bored in a motel room a while ago and scrawled down a brief philosophical/ecological rant. Here 'tis.

Evolutionarily speaking...

I am, effectively, a baby factory. Evolutionarily speaking, I'm not supposed to have a career.

So, if I was playing by the traditional ecological rules, I would simply give birth to and care for as many children as possible, in order to propagate the species.

In actual fact, that would be exactly what the human race does not need. What the human race needs is to better educate its members who still play by those out-of-date, instinct-reinforced rules... or alternatively, nuclear warfare. Either way, numbers must go down (preferably through population stability rather than mass genocide).

It is feasible that with sufficient technological advancement, nearby planets/moons could be terraformed and inhabited. However, we can by no means be assured of this, so resolving the situation on our current planet would clearly be more intelligent than holding out for that remote possibility.

Tags

Baby Factory, Birth, Career, Children, Earth, Ecological, Ecology, Educate, Education, Evolution, Genocide, Global, Human, Human Race, Inhabit, Instinct, Mankind, Mass Genocide, Moons, Nicola Treadwell, Nuclear, Nuclear Warfare, Numbers, Numbers Must Go Down, Personal Experience, Planets, Population, Population Control, Population Growth, Population Stability, Propagate, Resolve, Rules, Situation, Species, Synthaea, Technological, Technology, Techological Advancement, Terraform, Terraforming, The Earth, Traditional, World

Meet the author

author avatar Synthaea
I'm quite a bizarre teenager. Intellect and eccentricity enthrall me. I am torn between science and literature, unsure which I wish my future to rest with.

Writing is my constant, and ensures my sanity (or perhaps lack thereof).
If you'd like to c...(more)

Share this page

moderator johnnydod moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know

Comments

author avatar Jerry Walch
20th Sep 2010 (#)

If you stop to think about it for a minute, women have played a much greater role in history than being "nothing more than baby factories."

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
20th Sep 2010 (#)

Oh, you're absolutely right. Looking at mankind from a historical perspective, i.e. taking society, culture and so forth into account, of course women have played a vital role. But evolutionarily? Our primary function by far is the bearing and raising of children. I was not promoting sexism or gender inequality, merely stating a scientific truth.

Also, you'll note that I didn't say "nothing more than baby factories", I said "I am, effectively, a baby factory", which isn't quite the same thing. :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar Jerry Walch
20th Sep 2010 (#)

In today's world, whether a woman becomes a baby factory or not is up to her. Women are having babies later in life today, waiting until they have established themselves in a career. Many women aren't having children at all. Biologically you are correct because it's the female members of the race that nature has equipped to bare children but that doesn't mean that she has too. Today it's a personal choice. Evolutionarily we have all evolved, even us males. We know longer drag females back to our caves to have our way with them :-))

I wasn't finding personal fault with you, Synthaea, but some of your rants are hard to respond to without having the comments sound that way.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
20th Sep 2010 (#)

You are definitely right, things are very different these days. And the human race has evolved, so I should have used 'biologically' instead of 'evolutionarily'. I meant according to "the traditional ecological rules", and was emphasising the fact that yes, times have changed, and we need to act accordingly rather than continue following our out-of-date instincts. The same also applies for cravings for fattening foods - our body tells us they taste good, because way back (very way back) they were a rarity, and something so energy-rich was precious. However, nowadays they are overabundant and we get far less exercise, so more often than not they're unhealthy - our tastebuds just haven't caught on yet.

Fair enough, I am very opinionated and make a lot of sweeping generalisations, so it's okay :P

Reply to this comment

author avatar Christine
22nd Sep 2010 (#)

Haha, love this quote "Either way, numbers must go down (preferably through population stability rather than mass genocide)." Also terraforming, you don't know what we could do with that. Maybe we could try and design a planets where people are always peaceful... hmm..

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
22nd Sep 2010 (#)

Thanks, haha. That wasn't actually supposed to sound humourous, but it did anyway and I decided to leave it. Humour is refreshing. :P

Terraforming is such an exhilarating idea. A bit absurd in how sci-fi it sounds, but certainly not impossible, and the results would be sure be incredible. Perhaps all manner of planets could be designed and created. But I don't think human nature will change much. And personally, I think that peace is overrated. Conflict is necessary sometimes.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Nicolaspondylus
24th Sep 2010 (#)

the question with me is, "what was she doing in a motel in the first place?!"

But to the main point, there has been huge evolution, but most of it has taken place outside of the human body. Studies of the human mind have only truly started in this past decade.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
25th Sep 2010 (#)

What *wasn't* I doing in a motel? ;) Lol, it was a holiday in the middle of nowhere.

And yes... I believe you're right. Societally, culturally, technologically - particularly technologically - the human race has undoubtedly evolved in recent times. Physically also, perhaps. But in terms of human nature and the human mind? Not really. We've pretty much stayed the same for a while.

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
25th Sep 2010 (#)

max kids u could produce from age 15 to 37 or so
may be one each year so minus the ones years that u've missed out balance calculate and let me know
a man can seed a generation and much more u know

sorry add on possible twins triplets
quads and rare quins too
so max do calculate will u
suggest u become
a nanny
and rear children many

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
25th Sep 2010 (#)

I would simply give birth to and care for as many children as possible, in order to propagate the species.


max kids u could produce from age 15 to 37 or so
may be one each year so minus the ones years that u've missed out balance calculate and let me know
a man can seed a generation and much more u know

sorry add on possible twins triplets
quads and rare quins too
so max do calculate will u
suggest u become
a nanny
and rear children many

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
25th Sep 2010 (#)

Yeah, it's technically possible for a woman to bear 20+ children. But in this day and age, why would she...? Lol.

"...I would simply give birth to and care for as many children as possible, in order to propagate the species."

The operative word in that sentence was 'would', i.e., I'd only do that if I was playing by the traditional ecological rules. My point is, I'm not going to, because I'm not playing by those rules - they are out-of-date in the modern world.

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
27th Sep 2010 (#)

lovely girl how and why have u changed ur snap that original one was exciting return if u please how old r u anyway? 19?

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
27th Sep 2010 (#)

How? You go to the "Edit your author photo" option on the menu on the right. Why? I got bored of the old one, but thank you for calling it 'exciting'. :P
I'm 17. :) Oh dear, I don't think I'm actually allowed to be publishing on this site, lol. How old are you, loverme?

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
27th Sep 2010 (#)

i am 100000000000 years in mind
physically i can't disclose
as i am anon
how old do u think i could be ur a nice kid
and friendly 222222222222

ur born in 1993
so u must be having long lovely hair
as a models but natural
ur good mature and not as bizarrre
as i thought

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
28th Sep 2010 (#)

Hmm, I'm really not sure how old you are. Your general demeanour/disposition is quite carefree which suggests that you're young, but you're also very perceptive and have a broad vocabulary which suggests that you're older. I suspect you're in your 20s or maybe 30s - which is not specific at all, sorry. I honestly don't have much of an idea.

Goodness, thanks. My hair is alright, sorely in need of a cut though. :D

Back at you - you also aren't as bizarre as I first thought. And you're nice, friendly, good and mature too, of course. :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
30th Sep 2010 (#)

love u for your NON BIZaARRE COMMENTS
i am not as young physically as i am of mind only 19

but i am really LOVELY sweet as honey and without any money

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
1st Oct 2010 (#)

"Sweet as honey and without any money" - naww, that's gorgeous. ;)

You certainly seem sweet and lovely to me. Money's quite overrated really. And I think the mind of a young adult is the best to have - still sharp but not too naive. I am curious as to your gender, though I realise that is something you don't want to disclose, so I'd best not ask. ;D

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

thanks honey ur also very sweet tooooooooooo

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

Hm, only sometimes. ;)

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
5th Oct 2010 (#)

for me always girlie ung 1111111111111

Reply to this comment

author avatar Nicolaspondylus
25th Sep 2010 (#)

All the thoughts of purposeful fornication seems tiresome.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
26th Sep 2010 (#)

Agreed.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Denise O
26th Sep 2010 (#)

Heck I haven't had a kid in 25 years and I am already tired just reading this.
I find, unlike my mother and her mother, my generation seemed fixated on two kids. Now, if my two kids seem to tilt our planet the wrong way, oh well....so be it.
Thanks for the rant. :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
26th Sep 2010 (#)

Having children is quite tiring, I believe. And I think that the more the global population increases, the fewer kids we (in the first world) feel inclined to have. I am sure your kids are lovely. ^^
You are quite welcome, Denise :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar SiddiQ
27th Sep 2010 (#)

Great article!

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
27th Sep 2010 (#)

Thanks SiddiQ! :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
27th Sep 2010 (#)

ur so intriguing
that i will like to transform u into poetry
only if u agree
so send a message
on my poem
next time u read me

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
28th Sep 2010 (#)

Gladly, loverme. :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

i shall compose now just hold it ....not me

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

POEM FOR YOU SYNTHEA










Synthea, Oh! Synthea
You are the bubbling
Blossoming youth,
I want to see,
Bizarre you say,
You can’t that ever be,
At your young age
You are so beautiful,
Wow intelligent too,
A rare combination for women
And
It’s because you are so
I like you Synthea,
Now it’s your turn
To write poetry for me

Will ye, will ye, will ye

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

~ Ode To Loverme ~

Loverme, O loverme
A pioneer in off-the-cuff poetry
Impulsive, freeform and carefree
Yet wise and clever, shrouded in mystery
A myriad of words at the fingertips of thee
Poems interspersed with glorious imagery
A golden apple on this Wikinut tree.

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
27th Sep 2010 (#)

i normally don\t share my email id but ur email doesn't work henmy email id but u r an intriguing young kid
if u want to converse
as a subject of my scientific research of the
human mind
u mnay get in touch with me
loverme of wikinut
at ur free will kid ce here

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
28th Sep 2010 (#)

My email does work, I'm sure of it :) have you tried sending something to it? Have another go. It doesn't look like a conventional email address, but it is.

It'd be great to converse with you, as a subject of scientific research or not. :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

please give me a proper id if u want me to share my email id which i rarely do ur a nice kid

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

new id please read below

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
2nd Oct 2010 (#)

Try synthaea@yahoo.com. :)

Reply to this comment

author avatar LOVERME
5th Oct 2010 (#)

this one also didn\t work minus the smiley figures u made

is try part of it???????????

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
5th Oct 2010 (#)

What?! Really? This is weird. No lol, "try" was not part of it and neither was the smiley.

On reflection, I think you have to add ".au" to the end of the address. Sorry, I only just made a Yahoo! account so I'm not quite used to it yet. So try:

synthaea@yahoo.com.au

And if that doesn't work, try synthaea@fastmail.fm again, because I know for a fact that that works.

Reply to this comment

author avatar wonder
7th Oct 2010 (#)

A warfare against instinct reinforced rules could do.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Synthaea
7th Oct 2010 (#)

My sentiments exactly, wonder.

Reply to this comment

Add a comment
Username
Can't login?
Password